|
Author
|
|
Topic: Does the Sun look the same to you? | Topic page views:
|
|
Bonehead9
Senior Member
suburb of Chicago, IL US
176 posts, May 2002
|
posted 05-16-2002 09:43 PM
  
Sorry if I seem a little testy, Theseaker, but I feel a little frustrated. To me the concept of Conservation of Angular Motion is intuitively obvious, but unfortunately, it is a little difficult to describe in a way that other people can look at and say "Oh, I see now."
Again, this is not an astronomy question but basic physics. As long as the Earth is rotating about its axis, then the axis will maintain the same orientation in space, no mater what!
But, you say, the Earth’s axis does rock back and forth. Yes, so be it, That doesn’t matter. There is no way that the Earth’s axis of rotation can significantly change from it’s existing orientation (regardless of the seasonal tilt) without violating the law of Conservation of Angular Momentum. Keep in mind also, that any force big enough to effect the Earth will effect the entire planet equally.
|
theseeker
One moon circles
Damnit...I'm a doctor jim
3403 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 05-17-2002 02:33 AM
don't sweat it bonehead, certain things were set in motion long ago and would take one helluva celestial event to alter...I certainly was not doubting your presentation on spin...and don't get discouraged, open~minded folks will listen...and some won't...a poster here yesterday popped off about ari fleirsure(sp) being a liar, I provided a link to connie rice's entire whitehouse statement regarding the discussed issues and was told by that poster to keep my opinion, when basically all I did was post a factual document...and make a reasonably sane observation... the Pteranodon is the favorite "terrible lizard" in this household...followed closely by the Triceratops and stegosaurus....
------------------
T/S
|
penumbra
quarky
North Carolina
668 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 05-17-2002 08:43 AM
I read a lot of info about the Chandler Wobble yesterday. Scientists think that changes in the ocean tidal movement (due to tectonic plate movement on the ocean floors) has the greatest effect on wobble variation. Of course increased solar activity has an effect on Earth's crustal movement. Volcanic eruptions also contribute to wobble variations, due to aerosol distribution in the upper atmosphere. There seems to be some disagreement among scientists as to whether earthquakes cause variations or vice versa. Here's what NASA has to say: The cause of this wobble is believed to reside in the natural resonances in the body of the spinning earth due to the detailed distribution of mass in its surface, interior, oceans and atmosphere. This system has a '14-month' harmonic which can be excited through a complex pattern of forcings by the moon, sun and sudden crustal rearrangements (earthquakes). There are many distinct periodic excitations by the sun and moon and their changing distances and tidal forcings, and these result in distinct monthly, yearly and multi-year periodicities in the polar wander. The Chandler Wobble may be a natural harmonic resonance that is also stimulated by these other constant lunar-solar forcings at the natural resonance frequency of the solid earth.
http://image.gsfc.nasa.gov/poetry/ask/a11657.html
|
Bonehead9
Senior Member
suburb of Chicago, IL US
176 posts, May 2002
|
posted 05-17-2002 06:07 PM
I would like to clear up one mistake I made in an earlier post, where I stated the Earth's axis rocks back and forth. Sorry about that (brain cramp). Actually the seasonal shift of the Earth is the perfect example of what I am trying to say. I found a good illustration here:  Notice that the axis maintains the same orientation in space. Also, don’t confuse Chandler’s wobble with the seasonal shift. As illustrated above, the seasons change because the Earth’s axis of rotation is not perpendicular to the orbital plane. Chandler’s wobble is very small compared to this.
[Edited 2 times, lastly by Bonehead9 on 05-17-2002]
|
KnewEyes
watcher
under those cloud-like things
665 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 05-18-2002 11:38 AM
Huh, what Duncan?
Gee, I was looking for the easy way out on this one! You are the science head, not me 
I was hoping you could press a few buttons and come up with the answer!
I went to that site and got the horizon azimuth points, but beyond that, I didn't know what to do with that info.
I guess if I put some time and effort into it, I would learn it, but,,, I have to feel the drive to learn a certain subject in order for it to "take". I have no control over what my desired subject of knowledge is,, it just is, or isn't and I'm finally coming to terms with "not being able to know it all" even though I may want to.
Knowledge comes easy,, or it doesn't, depending on what your essence is "geared for". So, I will try to do the best at what I do, and will appreciate the contributions of individuals who have the ability to do what I can't do, and I will wait till you get back from your getaway and hope that you can give an answer on this.
We all have a gift for one thing or another, and I have decided to let whatever mine is, to just flow,, without trying to force it in any way. I make no apologies for this either.
|
Duncan Kunz
Senior Member
582 posts, Oct 2000
|
posted 05-19-2002 12:21 AM
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Duncan Kunz on 06-06-2002]
|
PHANTOM911
Senior Member
341 posts, Oct 2001
|
posted 05-19-2002 02:14 AM
Duncan,
Just out of curiousity, do you know of any good hiking trails in the Sedona area? Something along the lines of a day's hike. I have been the length of Belle's Pass, enjoying every foot of trail and creek-side diversion, but we never really did anything in Sedona. I've jumped from the cliffs at Grasshopper Point and that's a blast. I've been all through Oak Creek Canyon and there's no place like that anywhere else on earth. It's beautiful! And the Verde River? In 1966, I was pulled into a whirlpool and sucked below the surface, when someone, to this day I don't know whom, dove from an electrical tower and saved my life. I've been back since to overcome any fear of Verde I may have had. All is well in that respect. Fishing has always been good too! Hoping to get there this year with my daughter on vacation, but nothing's definite yet. Anyway, greetings your way and let me know if there's somewhere in Sedona you reccomend.
|
KnewEyes
watcher
under those cloud-like things
665 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 05-19-2002 12:05 PM
Well Duncan,
Sounds like you've had a really nice time this weekend!
Looking at the cost of field equipment and good calibrated compasses, I'll tell you right now I am not running to the store anytime in the near future to buy one.
I promised those kids a vacation in July and extracting myself from that last vacation of mine, kind of wiped out any extra (lolol... "extra") funds I had saved. So,, buying an expensive compass is at the very bottom of my list at this time.
Surely there must be someone in the world reading this who has the compass, and the knowledge, and the desire to find and reveal their honest and accurate findings.
That doesn't mean I don't want to learn how to do this myself. I still do.
Hey all you field experts out there, Here's a simple question ,,,, Is the Sun setting in its proper place?
|
mark sky
bin Rydin
SW coast of Oregon
1089 posts, Jun 2001
|
posted 05-19-2002 01:05 PM
How preposperouse is moving the earth? http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/astro/2001-02-15-orbit.htm (this link is there one minute then gone the next) (copied in part below)
02/15/2001 - Updated 08:24 AM ET
Sun too close? We'll just change Earth's orbitBy Dan Vergan, USA TODAY Anyone worried about the sun frying Earth sometime in the next billion years can rest easy: Astronomers have devised a way to move our planet to a safer orbit. In a paper accepted by the journal Astrophysics and Space Science, planetary scientist Don Korycansky of the University of California-Santa Cruz and colleagues detail a plan to remove Earth from its current orbit to a cooler one using "gravitational slingshot" tugs provided by massive asteroids or comets redirected to pass nearby. "Large-scale planetary engineering is possible with technical procedures we know about now," Korycansky says. The researchers say mankind will need a scheme like this to save Earth's atmosphere from the heat of the sun, predicted to grow 11% hotter over the next 1.1 billion years. The plan would entail sticking a fusion-powered rocket or solar sail on a 62-mile-wide asteroid, or comet, to nudge it out of orbit — a simple "engineering problem," Korycansky says. While not plentiful, such sizable objects do dwell in the Kuiper Belt region of icy bodies orbiting in the region of Pluto. The plan would have the asteroid give Earth a gravity tug as it passes by. Then the asteroid would slingshot around the sun and loop around Jupiter for another return trip past Earth. Each round trip would last 6,000 years. Over millions of years, the gravity assists would pull the planet from 93 million miles away from the sun — too close — to a comfy 140 million-mile orbit, Korycansky estimates. However, he and his colleagues note a few drawbacks: We may lose the moon.
The gravity tugs might spin Earth faster, shortening a day to a few hours.
Mars and Venus apparently need Earth to stay in their orbits.
The scheme might pull Jupiter 10 million miles closer to the sun, disturbing the asteroid belt and sending more rocks hurtling onto our planet.
A miscalculation might send the 62-mile-wide asteroid slamming into Earth, which "would sterilize the biosphere most effectively, at least to the level of bacteria," the astronomers warn.
"Their analysis shows that it works, but I don't think we'd want to do it this way," says astronomer Jack Lissauer of NASA's Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, Calif. A story about the analysis carried by BBC Online caught the attention of astronomers concerned with ways to deflect asteroids aimed at the Earth. A gravity slingshot may represent one way to handle such hazards, Lissauer suggests. "If we don't destroy ourselves, we have a billion years to figure this one out," he adds. "Who knows what technology we will have in just 1,000 years?" In the final analysis, he compares the planet-moving scheme to primitives figuring out a way to build the Golden Gate Bridge out of rope. "We could do it, but who'd want to?"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
See also http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1154000/1154784.stm
Monday, 5 February, 2001, 16:56 GMT
Planet Earth on the move Moving 5.972 sextillion tonnes is relatively "simple" By BBC News Online science editor Dr David Whitehouse
Mankind will soon have the ability to move the Earth into a new orbit, say a team of astronomers. The planetary manoeuvre may more than double the time life can survive on our planet, they believe. Our initial analysis shows that the general problem of long-term planetary engineering is almost alarmingly feasible
Korycansky and colleagues
Our Sun will increase its brightness in the next billion years or so, and if the Earth stays in its present orbit it will be fried and all life eliminated.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by mark sky on 05-19-2002]
|
Duncan Kunz
Senior Member
582 posts, Oct 2000
|
posted 05-19-2002 01:12 PM
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Duncan Kunz on 06-06-2002]
|
mark sky
bin Rydin
SW coast of Oregon
1089 posts, Jun 2001
|
posted 05-19-2002 01:16 PM
WELL THATS WHAT IS GOING ON!!!!!!!!!The firewall has blocked Internet access to www.usatoday.com (66.54.32.237) (HTTP) from your computer [TCP Flags: S].
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Climate Wobble Linked To Rare Anomaly In Earth's Orbit our planet is driven by never ending eccentricity and obliquity
Santa Cruz - April 12, 2001
About 23 million years ago, a huge ice sheet spread over Antarctica, temporarily reversing a general trend of global warming and decreasing ice volume. Now a team of researchers has discovered that this climatic blip at the boundary between the Oligocene and Miocene epochs corresponded with a rare combination of events in the pattern of Earth's orbit around the Sun.
In a paper published in the April 13 issue of the journal Science, the researchers show that the transient glaciation and other climatic variations during a period from about 20 to 25.5 million years ago correspond with variations in Earth's orbit known as Milankovitch cycles....... more at http://www.spacedaily.com/news/iceage-01a.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Changes In Sun's Intensity Tied To Recurrent Droughts In Maya Region Mayan Pyramid Uxmal Yucatan Mexico Central America
by Aaron Hoover
Gainesville - May 17, 2001
The Maya were talented astronomers, religiously intense in their observations of the sun, moon and planets. Now, new research shows something in the heavens may have influenced their culture and ultimately helped bring about their demise.
In an article set to appear in Friday's issue of the journal Science, a team of researchers led by a University of Florida geologist reports finding that the Yucatan Peninsula, seat of the ancient Maya civilization, was buffeted by recurrent droughts. More importantly, the research shows, the droughts -- one of which is thought to have contributed to the collapse of the Maya civilization -- appear to have been caused by a cyclical brightening of the sun. more at> http://www.spacedaily.com/news/climate-01f.html
|
penumbra
quarky
North Carolina
668 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 05-22-2002 11:44 AM
More back-to-back flares:   
[Edited 2 times, lastly by penumbra on 05-22-2002]
|
penumbra
quarky
North Carolina
668 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 05-22-2002 12:00 PM
In fact, there is at least one more... check it out:
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data/realtime/realtime-c2.html
|
penumbra
quarky
North Carolina
668 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 05-22-2002 12:03 PM
Some discussion on solar activity:
http://www.stealthsearch.net/~orbitforum/message.php?message=218&topic=1&mpage=1
|
penumbra
quarky
North Carolina
668 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 05-22-2002 12:06 PM
quote:
SUNSPOT WATCH: Magnetic fields above two sunspots (9957 and 9961) are twisted and sheared. Like taut rubber bands poised to snap back, these fields could erupt at any time. Forecasters estimate a 20% chance of X-class solar flares during the next 24 hours.
http://www.spaceweather.com/
|
penumbra
quarky
North Carolina
668 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 05-22-2002 12:08 PM
Oh, and the sunspot number for today is 185
|
penumbra
quarky
North Carolina
668 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 05-23-2002 01:24 PM
Kent has got all of the solar links at the top of his front page right now. Check out the charts: http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/ Also, Aurora Alert. Current auroral activity level is 10, and will probably continue to climb as we get hit by this storm full-on...
|
KnewEyes
watcher
under those cloud-like things
665 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 05-23-2002 03:30 PM
Look up, there is a Universe up there!Space Weather News for May 23, 2002 http://www.spaceweather.com A coronal mass ejection (CME) that billowed away from the Sun on May 22nd
is heading toward Earth. The expanding cloud could trigger a geomagnetic
storm at middle latitudes when it arrives on Thursday, May 23rd or (more
likely) Friday, May 24th. Sky watchers should remain alert for auroras on
both nights. Our planet will also encounter a solar wind stream flowing
from a coronal hole during the days ahead. Solar wind gusts could stir up
additional geomagnetic activity. Stay tuned to spaceweather.com for
updates.
|
Deborah
Take It To The Limit
Flagstaff, AZ
700 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 05-31-2002 09:18 AM
Have just about completed my last few weeks' comparisons of photos from May 2001 with the *current* position of the pre-setting sun as relative to existing, stationary landmarks in a consistent field-of-view.Based on this set of comparisons, there does not appear to be a change in the position of the sun. Which leaves me with the conclusion that it was the considerably amplified INTENSITY of the sun this spring that made me notice it coming into a certain window by a certain time of day unusually *early* this year. At this point, on clear [sic] days I am forced to lower my shades by 4:30-5:00pm if I want to sit at my computer bench, etc. The incoming sunlight is simply too intense otherwise.
|
Bonehead9
Senior Member
suburb of Chicago, IL US
176 posts, May 2002
|
posted 05-31-2002 10:14 AM
Deborah, The summer solstice is about three weeks away.
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/astronomy/SummerSolstice.html
|
Deborah
Take It To The Limit
Flagstaff, AZ
700 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 05-31-2002 11:33 AM
.....Deborah, The summer solstice is about three weeks away.....Uh - yes. Thank you. And your point is...?
|
Bonehead9
Senior Member
suburb of Chicago, IL US
176 posts, May 2002
|
posted 05-31-2002 12:59 PM
At the summer solstice, The earth’s tilt is such that the sun's rays are the most directly overhead (to the north) than at any other time in the Northern Hemisphere. This means less atmosphere for the solar energy to travel through, so the sun is brightest and the most intense at this time. I'm glad that sun is still rising and setting where it should be. Think of how disappointed all the people would be that journey to view the solstice sunrise at ancient observatories like the ruins at Chichen Itza, Chaco Canyon or Stonehenge.
|
Deborah
Take It To The Limit
Flagstaff, AZ
700 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 05-31-2002 01:23 PM
.....This means less atmosphere for the solar energy to travel through, so the sun is brightest and the most intense at this time.....Yes, I realize that. But the *intensity* I am referring to is not the same thing. I have noticed since December 1999 that the sun appears more intense - and much brighter - than usual - at ALL times of the year. This last year - especially since fall 2001 - this amplification of brightness and intensity has been particularly noticable. I am not the only one making this observation. I don't have time for superficial chat about trivial matters. I'm genuinely concerned about the increasing intensity of the sun and am simply sharing consistent, direct observation on the subject. I cannot currently occupy a particular section of my studio at a certain time of day because the sun is too intense. I've been living here for 14 years now. This is something new THIS YEAR. Just like the fact that I start to burn in less than 5 minutes under direct sunlight on a clear [sic] day *this time of year* is something NEW. Thanks,
Deborah
|
Duncan Kunz
Senior Member
582 posts, Oct 2000
|
posted 05-31-2002 05:57 PM
[Edited 2 times, lastly by Duncan Kunz on 06-06-2002]
|
Deborah
Take It To The Limit
Flagstaff, AZ
700 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 05-31-2002 07:33 PM
Mr. Kunz wrote:.....Now I don't know what else I can do to show that the Sun has not been heating up recently..... I don't recall making any reference of any kind to the sun itself's "heating up." What I am describing - and primarily concerned about - is the intensity of the sun's LIGHT - and the photochemical interactions this OBSERVABLY increased intensity is exacerbating at the surface - especially in highly-polluted urban areas. As for the heat - yes - THAT is observable here *at the surface* in my location as well. When the sun is _unoccluded by a sky full of crap_ the heat reality here is just plain abnormal for this time of year. It might interest you to know that I am communicating regularly with someone in Arizona. It is my understanding that being outdoors down there this week is rather unpleasant, to say the very least. I think we have a *leetle problem* with the stratospheric ozone layer over parts of the northern hemisphere. What do you think? Thank you,
Deborah
| |
Chemtrail Central Forum
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
This topic is 10 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 
